Court Rebuffs Emojico’s SAD Scheme TRO Request

This is a very recent Emojico SAD Scheme enforcement (filed last week). I’ve blogged a few Emojico cases before (see the link list below). Indeed, my interest in the SAD Scheme started with an Emojico case, so I pay a little extra attention to their litigation pratfalls. Here, a court easily and instantly flyswats away their bogus case. Emojico started with the standard SAD Scheme argument that all of the defendants are counterfeiters, which necessarily proves they are infringers, res ipsa loquitor. The court doesn’t accept this simplistic syllogism: Plaintiff has failed to show that the marks used by Defendants are similar; indeed, many of the marks are so dissimilar that the Court lacks the confidence required for the extraordinary remedy of a temporary restraining order that a factfinder would find in Plaintiff’s favor… the goods appear to be far from identical. For example, Defendant 2 sells a shower curtain with a lifelike image of man screaming. It is difficult to imagine how…